Vergne letting Vettel through in Abu Dhabi

Is this something we could control? Forget it's a STR vs RBR, have you never ever seen another driver letting other by easily because he saw no point in fighting with him at that stage? What do you suppose should be done about that?

This thread is laughable for that very reason, it's completely a product of bias, any other similar situation involving different teams wouldn't be looked at twice, the fact we are discussing this more than a week after the fact is telling me that Austin couldn't come soon enough.

The same thing he would have done if the car behind would have been Alonso's (or any other not RB title contender). This time is didn't make any difference but in the future could be a big problem if STR comes with a faster car. Imagine Brazil 2007 with a STR in the place of the Toyota (but fast enough to hold the RB for a lap) and Vettel as Hamilton...

Is this something we could control? Forget it's a STR vs RBR, have you never ever seen another driver letting other by easily because he saw no point in fighting with him at that stage? What do you suppose should be done about that?This thread is laughable for that very reason, it's completely a product of bias, any other similar situation involving different teams wouldn't be looked at twice, the fact we are discussing this more than a week after the fact is telling me that Austin couldn't come soon enough.

Is this something we could control? Forget it's a STR vs RBR, have you never ever seen another driver letting other by easily because he saw no point in fighting with him at that stage? What do you suppose should be done about that?

This thread is laughable for that very reason, it's completely a product of bias, any other similar situation involving different teams wouldn't be looked at twice, the fact we are discussing this more than a week after the fact is telling me that Austin couldn't come soon enough.

The same thing he would have done if the car behind would have been Alonso's (or any other not RB title contender). This time is didn't make any difference but in the future could be a big problem if STR comes with a faster car. Imagine Brazil 2007 with a STR in the place of the Toyota (but fast enough to hold the RB for a lap) and Vettel as Hamilton...

But that's exactly what happened. I remember at least 2 drivers in Brazil 2007 who just let Hamilton past on the straight, with the intention to not get involved in the championship fight (which they of course did by not racing Hamilton).

But that's exactly what happened. I remember at least 2 drivers in Brazil 2007 who just let Hamilton past on the straight, with the intention to not get involved in the championship fight (which they of course did by not racing Hamilton).

Answer honestly. Do you believe a STR would have done to a RB the same Petrov did to Alonso in 2010? Do you believe if Vergne would have been in front of Alonso (or any other title contender) it wouldn't have tried to hold him as much as he could?

I agree with 'fisti on the practical realities. Still, I don't like it. Having an easier ride because you have a "sister" team (whether through common ownership, engine deal or otherwise) isn't a good thing for F1 IMO. The difficulty is in proving that any inter-team orders occurred, and who you p*ss off when you punish them.

I'd hope the FIA would, at least, have a quiet word to RB to let them know that whilst they may have gotten away with it this time, it won't be tolerated in future.

But continuing with the practical, what would you have the STRF drivers do? Do you want them to block like Senna - uselessly causing wing damage for Webber or Vettel?

Think before you answer because you have to realize the same will apply when OTHER front runners come through after pitting and so forth. Ricciardo and Vergne do not presently block any of the forerunners with the gusto of Senna, Maldonado, Grosjean or Perez. Their car is just below those and at the head of the pack at the back.

So what is it exactly you would have them do as applied to all front runners passing them, in practical terms?

Answer honestly. Do you believe a STR would have done to a RB the same Petrov did to Alonso in 2010? Do you believe if Vergne would have been in front of Alonso (or any other title contender) it wouldn't have tried to hold him as much as he could?

Huh? I was just pointing out the mistake in your example, no need to get upset about that.

To your question, I don't know. Even that example is pretty flawed considering Petrov was actually fighting Alonso for position and comfortably keeping him behind mind you, and not just holding him up while Alonso was recovering from the back of the grid. Vergne would've gotten passed on the following DRS zones even had he tried everything to stop it so not that big of a deal.

Had it been someone else than Vettel, perhaps he would've forced them to make the pass (although Vergne did let Schumacher ahead later in the exact same way later on, so perhaps all facts aren't there), that possibility is always there. Although I remember a Sauber doing work for Ferrari in crucial junctures of 1997 and 2003 championships, so it happens.

This is a very minor incident and I certainly don't blame Vergne, but still highlights why I don't want 3 car teams (besides occasional guest races) or customer cars. Give power over too many competitors to too few economic groups and these things will happen more often. As an extreme example see slower Audis and Mercedes punting out the leaders from the opposing camp in DTM a few years back.

The more independent competitors the better and STR aren't independent.

Not really, considering Kimi obviously beat Massa on speed in Brazil. He stayed out for 3-4 laps later, set a couple of fastest laps and came out ahead, what's so hard to understand still? Clearly they would've swapped the positions anyway but that's irrelevant.

Not really, considering Kimi obviously beat Massa on speed in Brazil. He stayed out for 3-4 laps later, set a couple of fastest laps and came out ahead, what's so hard to understand still? Clearly they would've swapped the positions anyway but that's irrelevant.

Iirc Massa made sure, Kimi came out ahead, as he faked a driving mistake at Juncao.

Iirc Massa made sure, Kimi came out ahead, as he faked a driving mistake at Juncao.

Wasn't that before either's pit stops? And maybe it's just me, but I don't see the point in starting to fake lock ups and driving errors when all you need to do is tell Massa to drop the pace if needed.

It's completely different letting someone pass at the beginning or letting a driver pas at the end of the race. Vergne knew he had no chance fighting a much faster car and trying to defend the position would mean destroying the tires, losing time, risking an accident and in the end he would still lose the position. So it's more a strategy option than a non sportsmanship behavior. In the other hand at the end of the race you are definitely racing someone that is behind and letting him pass means you are certainly going to have a worse result and than characterizing a poor sportsmanship behavior. If Vergne had made the exactly same move at the end of the race would had been disgusting.

When's the last time you've seen any of the backmarkers, who are at that point also actual backmarkers (not those having a good day, like Sato on Alonso), try to take a real fight to the front runners?

edit: apart from Monaco.

In the very last race a backmarker fought Vettel to the point of breaking his front wing (I don't remember who he was). He did not just open the door for him.

The way Vergne literally jumped out of Vettel's way, not only leaving the racing line but also driving with 2 wheels off the circuit is an embarrassment to the sport. Red Bull own 2 teams and 4 drivers which gives them an obvious easy advantage over the rest of the grid.

But continuing with the practical, what would you have the STRF drivers do? Do you want them to block like Senna - uselessly causing wing damage for Webber or Vettel?

Think before you answer because you have to realize the same will apply when OTHER front runners come through after pitting and so forth. Ricciardo and Vergne do not presently block any of the forerunners with the gusto of Senna, Maldonado, Grosjean or Perez. Their car is just below those and at the head of the pack at the back.

So what is it exactly you would have them do as applied to all front runners passing them, in practical terms?

Same thing as they do vs the other drivers. I recall Hamilton being behind STRs at various points this season - whilst they didn't defend like their lives depended on it, they didn't jump out of the way like a scalded cat, either.

Driving in the same manner as the instruction Webber received would do me: if a leader/much faster car gets a run on you, don't defend, but otherwise drive as normal.

Sorry if this is already discussed. I was wondering, does this count as a team order? Should this be legal?

I was a tad annoyed with it - it's a huge unfair advantage that Red Bull have, though perhaps, Ferrari is having a bit similar relation with Sauber (cause of the engines). Perez didn't go all out in Malysia on Alonso.

Anyhow, team orders are legal, within the team, as long as it's not for a race win, right? What do the rules say about this? Cause to me this was a team order.

I remember the likes of Anthony Davidson moving over for Hamilton back in 2007, so it's kind of normal these days. The Marussia's and Senna didn't give Vettel much a fight either, so.

Not really, considering Kimi obviously beat Massa on speed in Brazil. He stayed out for 3-4 laps later, set a couple of fastest laps and came out ahead, what's so hard to understand still? Clearly they would've swapped the positions anyway but that's irrelevant.

We can can use the two times Grosjean let Kimi through this season if it would make you happier.

But that´s how it goes, sometimes a car will decide not to fight at all, it can be a teammate, someone from a friendly team, or just someone totally unrelated. Schumacher jumped out of the way like that too. Not nice to see at all, but no big deal either.

Luckyly in the end this had no relevance. Vettel would have got a better run out, deployed DRS, fly by with the tow, and be back in line for the braking zone. If anything, he lost the tow

Same thing as they do vs the other drivers. I recall Hamilton being behind STRs at various points this season - whilst they didn't defend like their lives depended on it, they didn't jump out of the way like a scalded cat, either.

Driving in the same manner as the instruction Webber received would do me: if a leader/much faster car gets a run on you, don't defend, but otherwise drive as normal.

Ah, so just better showmanship. Well generally that is the case; it is the first time Vergne's ever hopped aside so. Who knows why, but since he does not do it all the time, I don't understand the need to comment. He clearly did it in error. Normally he just drives and allows top cars around without the hop effect.

If that's the BS level this thread shall go to, I claim it's all Raikönnens fault for being let through by Massa in Brazil 2007. Or Hamiltons, for the same thing with Kova in Hockenheim '08.

Take your pick!

Massa let Raikkonen through in Brazil??? When, on what lap or HOW???

I think you need to at least get your facts & Eye sight corrected, coz Raikkonen jumped him in the pits by going 2 laps longer and setting 2 blistering laps on the same before pitting and coming ahead of Massa!

Seriously, just because it was possible that Massa would help Kimi... it didn't mean that help was applied! Also, Massa in his haste to not allow Kimi to jump him in the pits, actually did really 2 fast laps... but Kimi had him covered. So, don't make wild assumptions or state your "incorrect opinions" as facts.

Massa, poor soul, never got the chance to let Kimi through & sulk about it later like he did with Alonso. Raikkonen beat him properly in Brazil 2007.

On the contrary, Kimi let Massa through in China 08.... by slowing down by almost 20 seconds to allow Massa to catch up. That's how fast Kimi was making Massa eat his dust.

I'm about to open a thread about Vergne letting MS through at the same spot, just need to find some coverage on the internet.

I'm so glad I wasn't the only one that have seen that. Pity it is being ignored. I suppose it just doesn't support the idea of inter team orders and only Vettel benefiting from other drivers not putting up the "proper fight" so it should be ignored ;)

I find quite unacceptable to tell off Alguersuari who apparently was doing his flying lap because he blocked a driver from another team...I find a very obvious conflict of interest. So far the problems have been very small, but imagine if one day the Toro Rosso is better and can fight, from time to time, among the big ones?

I find quite unacceptable to tell off Alguersuari who apparently was doing his flying lap because he blocked a driver from another team...I find a very obvious conflict of interest. So far the problems have been very small, but imagine if one day the Toro Rosso is better and can fight, from time to time, among the big ones?

Take a look at it from a normal perspective:-

Alguersuari would not even be in Formula 1 without Helmut... so I don't see where the conflict of interest is being ruined. Technically, without Marko Polo.... JA would not have gotten a chance to do the blocking in the first place.

I wonder if Ferrari ever gives a rats ass about the conflict of interest regarding Massa.

It's childish to point the finger only at Helmut because Massa would have been fired on the spot for blocking Alonso by Ferrari as well!!

.... at least Marko had the decency to let JA complete the whole season. So in general, it's normal that team advisors get mad at their drivers, and vice-versa.

Personally I was disappointed but not surprised to see it happen; disappointed because I want to see the drivers racing. Letting Vettel through also gives him an advantage (perhaps an unfair one) compared to those around him. There's a difference in my mind between team orders and inter-team orders.

If we extend the argument and say look at a situation where one man owned say 4 teams. This would allow a hypothetical driver, attempting what Vettel did, by which I mean driving from the back, to pass 6 cars (outside of his own team) without any hindrance whatsoever. That would, in my opinion, definitely be an unfair advantage. Being able to pass 2 cars outside of your team then is, again in my opinion, an unfair advantage.

The rules should be amended to state that, team orders aside, drivers are at all times required to race each other.

Drivers do still have brains capable of thought and making there own judgements. I am sure Vergne was aware that vettel was coming up, as his team would have notified him. But the Team may or may not have givent the order, do we know which it is yet?

As previously noted, and just as quickly ignored, Vergne also let MSC through. Was that a team order as well?

Drivers do still have brains capable of thought and making there own judgements. I am sure Vergne was aware that vettel was coming up, as his team would have notified him. But the Team may or may not have givent the order, do we know which it is yet?

As previously noted, and just as quickly ignored, Vergne also let MSC through. Was that a team order as well?

I was assuming it was an order. I have to admit I wasn't aware that Vergne had also let MSC through. I didn't see it in the race either, that's not to say it didn't happen though. However even if MSC chose to let Vettel through it doesn't mean Vergne wasn't ordered to. There's no proof, that I'm aware of, either way. I'm only going off what it looked like to me during the race.

It's not really new, I'm fine with it as long as there are no mega-cartels in F1. Still one could always see one of the richer teams taking interest/investing money into 3 to 4 smaller teams and make it all go bad but so far that hasn't happened. It's not exactly in the F1 spirit but it's a pretty grey area since small teams like TR and Sauber are needed for F1 to stay a legitimate sport. Sometimes the money or the show trumps rules in any sport. It's a form of realpolitik that the FIA "looks the other way" when it happens. You can find plenty of examples in F1 alone where the rules said one thing and the Stewards or the FIA chose to interpret the rules in a variable way so as to not ruin anything too much, or ruin someone that wasn't popular with some people.

edit: for it being an order or not, well who knows, probably not. It's like how teams skirted the "team-order" ban. You make it clear to drivers before the race or somewhere in a back room. How Helmut Marko reacted in that video is an example. These drivers know they either get out of the way or potentially lose their drives. It's up to them to make a decision, but it's not hard to know what most drivers would decide.

I think you need to at least get your facts & Eye sight corrected, coz Raikkonen jumped him in the pits by going 2 laps longer and setting 2 blistering laps on the same before pitting and coming ahead of Massa!

Seriously, just because it was possible that Massa would help Kimi... it didn't mean that help was applied! Also, Massa in his haste to not allow Kimi to jump him in the pits, actually did really 2 fast laps... but Kimi had him covered. So, don't make wild assumptions or state your "incorrect opinions" as facts.

Massa, poor soul, never got the chance to let Kimi through & sulk about it later like he did with Alonso. Raikkonen beat him properly in Brazil 2007.

On the contrary, Kimi let Massa through in China 08.... by slowing down by almost 20 seconds to allow Massa to catch up. That's how fast Kimi was making Massa eat his dust.

Why am I not surprised the idea of Massa helping KR from Monza 2007 onwards (and especially in Brazil) provokes such an excited reaction?

I tell you why: because telling it like it is (was) on the matter in one big sweep devalues all the fake outrage about Hockenheim 2010. Pretty unfortunate, hm?

I'm a Kimi fan, but I don't mind admitting he's benefited from team orders before. As has Alonso, Vettel, Hamilton, etc. Who cares? Each team gets 2 cars. The problem here is Redbull has 4 cars. Simple, really. What's not so simple is judging each pass and enforcing penalties. For the record, I don't blame Vergne.

I'm a Kimi fan, but I don't mind admitting he's benefited from team orders before. As has Alonso, Vettel, Hamilton, etc. Who cares? Each team gets 2 cars. The problem here is Redbull has 4 cars. Simple, really.

I'm a Kimi fan, but I don't mind admitting he's benefited from team orders before. As has Alonso, Vettel, Hamilton, etc. Who cares? Each team gets 2 cars. The problem here is Redbull has 4 cars. Simple, really. What's not so simple is judging each pass and enforcing penalties. For the record, I don't blame Vergne.

I think you need to at least get your facts & Eye sight corrected, coz Raikkonen jumped him in the pits by going 2 laps longer and setting 2 blistering laps on the same before pitting and coming ahead of Massa!

Seriously, just because it was possible that Massa would help Kimi... it didn't mean that help was applied! Also, Massa in his haste to not allow Kimi to jump him in the pits, actually did really 2 fast laps... but Kimi had him covered. So, don't make wild assumptions or state your "incorrect opinions" as facts.

Massa, poor soul, never got the chance to let Kimi through & sulk about it later like he did with Alonso. Raikkonen beat him properly in Brazil 2007.

On the contrary, Kimi let Massa through in China 08.... by slowing down by almost 20 seconds to allow Massa to catch up. That's how fast Kimi was making Massa eat his dust.

Felipe didn't race his 100% in Brazil 2007, and it was obvious to anyone with at least one functioning eye.

And 20 seconds in China 2008 is a outright lie, it was around 5 seconds at most.

Iirc Massa made sure, Kimi came out ahead, as he faked a driving mistake at Juncao.

No kidding, two laps before his respective stop while pulling away from Kimi as if trying to build a gap to protect his lead during pit rotation. Massa really came pretty close to loosing it too where it was of paramount importance to Ferrari for him to finish, well I guess intentional faked driving mistake at corner exit is the next in line after exhausting the extended pit stop excuse (Massa's stop was bout .8 seconds longer than Räikkönen's having 4 more laps to go.)

For all I could see Massa wanted to concede his lead on track but Räikkönen pre-empted that by doing it during pit rotation, especially since swapping the positions was not yet prudent with McLarens still very much in the position to render it pointless. Perhaps I am vision impaired, blind even, but so far the only worthwhile evidence for team order at Brazil in 2007 is its presumed inevitability.